NVIDIA Quadro P1000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P1000 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P1000
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- Around 12% higher core clock speed: 1266 MHz vs 1127 MHz
- Around 26% higher boost clock speed: 1480 MHz vs 1178 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 2.6x lower typical power consumption: 47 Watt vs 120 Watt
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- 716x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 7.0 GB/s
- Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 832.248 vs 792.44
- Around 84% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 65.117 vs 35.338
- Around 22% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 245.081 vs 200.825
- 10.1x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1591 vs 157
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 7 February 2017 vs 22 January 2015 |
Core clock speed | 1266 MHz vs 1127 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1480 MHz vs 1178 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 47 Watt vs 120 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 7.0 GB/s |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 832.248 vs 792.44 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.117 vs 35.338 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 245.081 vs 200.825 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3702 vs 3691 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3348 vs 3335 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3702 vs 3691 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3348 vs 3335 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1591 vs 157 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
- Around 22% higher texture fill rate: 72 billion / sec vs 59.2 GTexel / s
- 2x more pipelines: 1024 vs 512
- Around 27% better floating-point performance: 2,413 gflops vs 1,894 gflops
- Around 36% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6100 vs 4479
- Around 14% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 673 vs 590
- Around 19% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 18663 vs 15667
- Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 73.733 vs 71.86
- Around 21% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.888 vs 4.039
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7218 vs 6796
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7218 vs 6796
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 72 billion / sec vs 59.2 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1024 vs 512 |
Floating-point performance | 2,413 gflops vs 1,894 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6100 vs 4479 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 vs 590 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 18663 vs 15667 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 73.733 vs 71.86 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.888 vs 4.039 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7218 vs 6796 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7218 vs 6796 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P1000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro P1000 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 4479 | 6100 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 590 | 673 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 15667 | 18663 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 71.86 | 73.733 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 832.248 | 792.44 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.039 | 4.888 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.117 | 35.338 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 245.081 | 200.825 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6796 | 7218 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3702 | 3691 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3348 | 3335 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6796 | 7218 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3702 | 3691 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3348 | 3335 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1591 | 157 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro P1000 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell 2.0 |
Code name | GP107 | GM206 |
Launch date | 7 February 2017 | 22 January 2015 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $375 | $199 |
Place in performance rating | 523 | 524 |
Price now | $319.99 | $229.99 |
Type | Workstation | Desktop |
Value for money (0-100) | 15.53 | 34.63 |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1480 MHz | 1178 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1266 MHz | 1127 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 1,894 gflops | 2,413 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 512 | 1024 |
Texture fill rate | 59.2 GTexel / s | 72 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 47 Watt | 120 Watt |
Transistor count | 3,300 million | 2,940 million |
CUDA cores | 1024 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 4x mini-DisplayPort | Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2, 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
HDCP | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 145 mm | 9.5" (24.1 cm) |
Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 6-pins |
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 400 Watt | |
SLI options | 2x | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 80.19 GB / s | 112 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 7.0 GB/s |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
CUDA | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost |